Racist Police Response to Ferguson Protests

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
And that's just fine. I agree. Wasn't saying I didn't agree. But silencing the other side, completely is wrong. But I don't think every crackpot theory should get equal airtime, either. I've never liked that system of news reporting, either.



i think that's what we're complaining about -- presenting "now, here's the other side ... we report, you decide ... teach the controversy" equivocates between two opinions that don't deserve the same weight. creationism isn't a different opinion from evolution. one is a scientific theory and the other is a religious belief. they aren't comparable. that's all.
 
i think that's what we're complaining about -- presenting "now, here's the other side ... we report, you decide ... teach the controversy" equivocates between two opinions that don't deserve the same weight. creationism isn't a different opinion from evolution. one is a scientific theory and the other is a religious belief. they aren't comparable. that's all.


Exactly, teaching or giving airtime to both sides when one side is completely wrong just isn't right. It's misleading to say that there's a debate over things such as whether creationism is true or whether the climate is changing. Giving airtime to both sides in a false equivalency situation is damaging to society. It's one of the reasons why we haven't taken any serious action to combat climate change.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Again, those are two different topics with different sides.

You should be able to hear both sides, perhaps even break it down into several facets, I think we used to do that as part of civil conversation at some point. Now it seems you either follow one school of thought or you are completely opposed to it. The gray has been removed. I guess it makes for better pseudo debate on fox and cnn :)


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
i think that's what we're complaining about -- presenting "now, here's the other side ... we report, you decide ... teach the controversy" equivocates between two opinions that don't deserve the same weight. creationism isn't a different opinion from evolution. one is a scientific theory and the other is a religious belief. they aren't comparable. that's all.

I think what I was trying to say got lost in the shuffle of me being at a festival right now. But basically I totally agree. Believe that or not.
 
Off topic what festival and was U2 there


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Again, those are two different topics with different sides.

You should be able to hear both sides, perhaps even break it down into several facets, I think we used to do that as part of civil conversation at some point. Now it seems you either follow one school of thought or you are completely opposed to it. The gray has been removed. I guess it makes for better pseudo debate on fox and cnn :)


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference




No. What's happened is that there used to be a center, if you will. There was agreed upon facts that were reported by a small number of need outlets. Now, there's infinite choice, which means fewer agrees upon facts, and he ability for people to exist in the echo chamber of a comments section on certain websites, or the ability to change the channel to more agreeable news when you don't like the reality of what's being reported. It's more and more grey that's the problem, IMO.


Sent from
 
Yeah to read both sides and go beyond page 1 of google, cnn, fox etc is sobering. To learn about something is to really consider what you don't agree with, which is hard for some people.

And I'm glad the name calling here is minimal!


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
That was actually a very impressive lineup. Lot of up and comers. Did you get to catch caribou(oldie but goodie)?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
No. What's happened is that there used to be a center, if you will. There was agreed upon facts that were reported by a small number of need outlets. Now, there's infinite choice, which means fewer agrees upon facts, and he ability for people to exist in the echo chamber of a comments section on certain websites, or the ability to change the channel to more agreeable news when you don't like the reality of what's being reported. It's more and more grey that's the problem, IMO.


Sent from

Ding. We have a winner
 
What do you think will happen in Ferguson (and the rest of the nation) if no charges are filed against Darren Wilson? (even if forensics, DOJ, and FBI all agree there was not enough evidence to charge). This is a hypothetical question.
 
What do you think will happen in Ferguson (and the rest of the nation) if no charges are filed against Darren Wilson? (even if forensics, DOJ, and FBI all agree there was not enough evidence to charge). This is a hypothetical question.

Whew. Considering what we've seen already, I don't want to imagine that scenario.
 
I was just wondering about that last night. Is he just sitting at home chilling right now? I thought that they did, at the very least, deem his death to be a homicide. Does the police officer just...walk around free until they file a charge?

That was actually a very impressive lineup. Lot of up and comers. Did you get to catch caribou(oldie but goodie)?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

No, we saw Caribou open for Radiohead a couple years ago and they haven't (yet) released anything new since, so we decided to pass. It was an OK festival that was very poorly managed.
 
What do you think will happen in Ferguson (and the rest of the nation) if no charges are filed against Darren Wilson? (even if forensics, DOJ, and FBI all agree there was not enough evidence to charge). This is a hypothetical question.

I think there's a high likelihood that Wilson will walk away with little to no meaningful charges, even if the evidence is strong enough to put a regular citizen away for life.
 
I think there's a high likelihood that Wilson will walk away with little to no meaningful charges, even if the evidence is strong enough to put a regular citizen away for life.

Really? Even with Holder looking over everyone's shoulder?
 
I think there's a high likelihood that Wilson will walk away with little to no meaningful charges, even if the evidence is strong enough to put a regular citizen away for life.

So what do you think would happen? Would people give up and go away, would they keep protesting in Ferguson until they get tired and nothing changes, or would it be LA 1993 all over again?
 
Wonder how the situation is in Utah with the similar incident


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
It all depends on how it's handled. If he walks away and there still isn't any real info released? Then yeah, it could be bad.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Really? Even with Holder looking over everyone's shoulder?

Honestly, yes. I think the history of trials against police officers kind of speaks for itself, even in cases where the evidence seemed compelling enough to convict. The laws governing police tactics are often written in such a way that give way more benefit of the doubt to police than a regular citizen would get in the same situation. And some of that is no doubt necessary due to the difficulty of the job and the potential for coming into contact with violence, but obviously it can be and historically has been abused by some officers.

I think if Holder does his job then this starts a process of meaningful nationwide reassessment and restructuring of police procedures and the protocols behind the use of force, deadly or otherwise.
 
It all depends on how it's handled. If he walks away and there still isn't any real info released?

I think this makes sense. At this point, there is going to need to be some forensic evidence released that PROVES Michael was still advancing. Some African-American eyewitnesses testimony that syncs with this evidence would also help calm people down - if Darren Wilson isn't charged.

If he is charged, and it goes to trial, and it seems it could either way (Zimmerman trial) - and he gets acquitted, I think that would also cause rioting.
 
The laws governing police tactics are often written in such a way that give way more benefit of the doubt to police than a regular citizen would get in the same situation.
I see your point. The defense (if it comes to that) probably has A LOT to work with regarding the right of the officer to engage with deadly force.

Just about every cop I've seen interviewed states that if Michael wasn't complying - and kept walking/charging toward the officer (especially after Michael already "wrestled/hit" the officer) - the officer was justified to keep firing until Michael was stopped (which in this case meant death).

It really all comes down to that - did Michael move toward the cop after he froze. If he did, then it seems, from what I've heard, the officer won't be charged with anything.
 
So what about this man Dillon Taylor, a white/Hispanic bloke who was killed by police in Utah. I assume this is what annoys AEON, that there is a big focus on Michael Brown, as he was a black killed by a white, but there has been less coverage about Dillon Taylor. I was going to post a link, but so far the two most prominent ones I've seen are from Fox News (whose bias I know about) and Washington Times. I have no idea who owns or what the bias is for the Washington Times, but judging by their reporting of it I get the feeling they are very much a Fox News/NY Post style paper.

I haven't got the time to do more researching, has Taylor's death got much coverage?
 
Back
Top Bottom